There is nothing about illegal immigration that should ipso facto involve matters of race, culture or ethnicity, given that it is a legal issue at heart. I think the great majority of opponents of open borders would be equally worried should 12 million illegal immigrants come here from a now bankrupt Ireland, Greece, or Portugal. That an illegal alien from a European country would claim my allegiance or empathy on the basis of ethnic solidarity would have zero currency.

So for most of us, the question is primarily a legal one — if federal statutes are not followed, what sanctity is left in the law itself? I am reminded of that classic exchange between Crito and Socrates, when the former urges the latter to break out of jail, disobey the law and its death sentence, and ignore what they both feel was an unfair verdict. Socrates, inter alia, reminds Crito that the individual cannot pick and choose his own level of compliance with those statutes he finds distasteful or inconvenient.

That is not to say that race hasn’t become inevitably intertwined throughout the discussion. Ruben Navarrette, Jr., on these PJM pages, cited some distasteful animal metaphors used in the context of illegal immigration by a number of officials and would-be officials that clearly cross the line of common decency. These, I think, are not the norm, but Navarrette is right nevertheless they must be condemned as reckless and thinly veiled racist speech.

By the same token, however, much of the amnesty movement itself resorts to tribal chauvinism and has turned the issue of sovereignty and illegality into an implied threat: either grant the DREAM Act or face the consequences of bloc voting in the future — as if all Latinos will think and act similarly, and one issue will adjudicate a voter’s electoral menu.

A million more eligible young Latino voters will be in play by the time votes are cast in 2012. In every state of the union, they are becoming the newest voting constituents of every Senator and Congressman. Do you think they will forget who voted for and against the DREAM Act in two years? What about the two million newly eligible voters in four years? Believe me when I tell you they will remember who fought for — and against — deporting their sisters, cousins, best friends, boyfriends, and teammates. … This generation of immigrants — like every generation before them in U.S. history — will become citizens and voters eventually. In the meantime, their neighbors, friends, and families are already citizens and voters and more are reaching voting age each day. They are writing down their naughty and nice lists this Christmas in pen, not pencil, and will remember what you give them this Christmas for a very, very long time.

Follow the disturbing logic that ignores principle and focuses on raw self-interest: either grant amnesty on my terms to some of those who are here illegally or we are going to punish you as enemies (perhaps channeling the president’s own election-eve characterization) at the polls.

Note also the unfortunate ethnic appeal of Gutierrez: he does not argue for the bill on the merits that pertain to all illegal aliens per se (e.g., whether Chinese or Somali) but instead on the basis of racial affinities, as in “young Latinos” and their “sisters, cousins, best friends, boyfriends, and teammates.”

One wonders, would Rep. Gutierrez be so animated an advocate for DREAM-Act amnesty should the matter had involved, say, hundreds of thousands of Asian illegal aliens? And if not, why not? And are we to believe all Latino-American youth must naturally put aside concerns about the law and make those worries secondary to ethnic solidarity? Do we really wish each constituency in America to see shared problems in terms of our own ethnic “sisters, cousins, best friends, boyfriends and teammates” — or, in the recent racist appeals of a Rep. Loretta Sanchez, to vote according to ethnic heritages?

Finally, Gutierrez offers a disturbing racialist snide remark with: “I see a delightful — and at times challenging — spark of hope in the spirit of the young people fighting for this bill, whether it would help them directly or not. It is a remarkable counter-example to the stereotype of Facebook and Game Boy addicted youth who are thought to be apathetic about their nation, her laws, and society at large.”

I think Gutierrez’s implication is that those Latinos who are fighting for DREAM Act amnesty are in marked contrast with the rest of American youth (mostly non-Hispanic?) that in his view are apathetically addicted to Facebook and Game Boy and thus lack Gutierrez’s admirable notion of ethnic solidarity. But then note how Orwellian his rant becomes: he characterizes those youth not supporting veritable disobedience to federal law as “apathetic … about her laws.” In contrast, does not residing for years as an illegal alien constitute being “apathetic” about America’s “laws”?

Most illegal aliens simply left Mexico for a better life in the United States, mostly on word of mouth that there was very little enforcement of immigration law, work was plentiful, and prospects were far brighter than in Mexico. Most do not wish to go back to Mexico, understanding that while Mexico is a naturally rich country, it operates on political and economic principles that do not ensure wealth, security, and dignity for its own, at least in the manner of the United States.

Unfortunately a shrill elite finds, as Rep. Gutierrez implied, political capital in framing legal issues in terms of race and ethnic solidarity. In that context, they are the mirror image of those who in thinly veiled racial terms demonize illegal aliens.

One, for example, can still go onto a MEChA website and find separatist racial chauvinism. If most of the sites have been scrubbed of the old nonsense about a brown state for a brown people and “everything for the race” nonsense, enough remains to disturb:

MEChA must bring to the mind of every young Chicana and Chicano that the liberation of her/his people from prejudice and oppression is in her/his hands and this responsibility is greater than personal achievement and more meaningful than degrees, especially if they are earned at the expense of her/his identity and cultural integrity. MEChA, then, is more than a name; it is a spirit of unity, of sisterhood and brotherhood, and a resolve to undertake a struggle for liberation in society where justice is but a word. MEChA is a means to an end …

The Mexican-American (Hispanic) is a person who lacks respect for his/her cultural and ethnic heritage. Unsure of her/himself, she/he seeks assimilation as a way out of her/his “degraded” social status. Consequently, she/he remains politically ineffective. In contrast, Chicanos reflects self-respect and pride on one’s ethnic and cultural background. Thus, the Chicana/o acts with confidence and with a range of alternatives in the political world. She/he is capable of developing an effective ideology through action.

This message of “cultural integrity” and opposition to assimilation is not just rehashed sixties braggadocio, but again jumps out on the opening pages of such websites. It gets much worse from the racist La Voz of Aztlan, an extremist and marginal publication where one can read of real hatred and talk of “gringo dollars” — in addition to the most overt anti-Semitism imaginable, on par with the Klan’s anti-Jewish diatribes.

Even some mainstream Latino groups for some reason still cling to racialist terminology, as in the National Council of La Raza. In another Orwellian example, it arbitrarily has announced that raza simply does not mean what raza means (e.g., race, from Latin radix). But no one would find that assertion believable anywhere in the Spanish speaking world.

129 Comments, 65 Threads

The illegal immigration lobby has an impossible task. The case is weak by any standard. The rationale seems to be that if a person gets away with breaking the law for 10 years, all should be forgiven.

On top of that, there is little racism toward Hispanics; many Hispanics have successfully integrated into the larger culture; most immigrants are delighted to be in the US; nobody was forced to come here; and Hispanic culture has numerous conservative elements.

It’s hard to inflame a really good mad-on under those conditions.

But that won’t stop the indefatigable Community Organizers from trying. Apparently, there isn’t a more lucrative scam available to them.

Illegal immigration will continue unabated until the Federal government…the same one that now turns a blind eye to border security…forces states, local governments and municipalities to abide by U.S. immigration laws. Leftist-governed states such as Washington openly issue drivers licenses and voter registration cards to illegals, while cities such as San Francisco celebrate their self-declared “sanctuary” status. My own hard-left WA St. county, Jefferson, refuses to assist the U.S. Border Patrol in enforcing immigration laws.

Hopefully at some point, the U.S. Government can impose severe economic penalties against states and local governments that refuse to comply with Federal immigration laws.

As I read it, Sachs likens you to a Colossus and he a helpless pygmy as you, a private citizen, leads us into wars while he watches helplessly. WOW, I am totally impressed, you have some gonads an he obviously none, or so he implies. He stands beside you helpless and afraid. I’d take everything he said as a huge compliment and a complete diss of himself.

Perhaps your perspective might vary if your dad, grandad, uncle, had been gutshot on a jap beachhead and finally screamed himself to death a few hours later. Perhaps such an event would have precluded your existence. Now, when the Manson gang is trying to batter down your front door, you will not call the cops, because they might do violence to the Manson-monsters?
Whether your motive is cowardice or stupidity; you got it wrong!

BINGO! I just said on Radosh’s commentary, that I looked forward with delight to your evisceration of Professor Sad Sachs, and that, if he is as smart as some people think he is, he should know better than to bait you. As usual you didn’t let us down. Your last sentence should go into the text book of classic put-downs.

I will preface my remarks with pointing out that I am calm and completely sober. As matter of fact, I just woke up and I am drinking a cup of hot chocolate. Jeffrey Sachs is a Harvard guy. He has never learned how to sufficiently think and follow a logical argument. Sachs has resided in an academic cultural milieu where one simply places his wet finger into the air to see which way the winds of the zeitgeist are blowing. Those who also graduated from an Ivy League institution rarely, if ever, demand that Sachs present rational reasons why he might disagree with somebody like Victor Davis Hanson. Sachs and his ideological buddies could not adequately debate Hanson if their lives depended on it. And I am not even slightly exaggerating. A five minute discussion is too much for them to handle. It would be similar to a second string basketball high school player going one on one with Kobe Bryant.

A softer discipline Ivy Leagues university credential should be treated suspiciously. The odds are very high that it is not worthy of respect. It is usually solid evidence that the recipient is an intellectual prostitute. Grade inflation is rampant. The standards have continued to fall especially since the student riots took place in the 1960s. Harvard professor Harvey Mansfield even openly admits this harsh fact. We have every right to consider these Ivy Leaguers as idiots until proven otherwise.

David,
I checked out Sachs on Wiki to see what he had been doing that was perhaps not on my radar screen. I did know about his Eastern Europe adventures and I’ve seen him on TV pontificating about his ideas for saving the world. What I didn’t realize was that he has graduated from the lowly Ivy League and entered the International League full time, which entails spending all your time receiving awards and serving on boards. Seriously, how does one find time to think when your schedule is full of writing acceptance speeches and socializing with UN folks? And then there is his time with Angelina and Bono. He is obviously just the person to understand the culture, customs, and wishes of the world’s poor. What a pompous dolt!

New topic: Several years ago, on a visit back to the states, I went to my hometown mall. Now my hometown has always had some immigrants, but not in enclave-sustaining numbers. They have always blended into the society. As I started to enter through the Penney’s door, I noticed that “push” and “pull” were also written in Spanish. Then I noticed that there were also two of the little stores hours signs next to the door, one on Spanish. There was nothing in Romanian, although newcomers have built a Romanian Orthodox Church in town, nor was there any special help for the women inside who was discussing the clothes in languages other than English or Spanish. I found it amazing that these people seemed to get along fine without instructions on how to open a door. I could only conclude that someone had put the screws to Penney’s about diversity at the corporate level. I was insulted for the Hispanics in town who were assumed to be dumber than any other ethnic group. I can’t believe these people will reward the PC Dems with permanent allegiance. At some point, the condescension will hit them.

That’s called Leftist racism [of the dumbing down type]. In the event you weren’t aware that it has existed for a long time, it has, particularly with regard to so-called third world countries, especially in the continent of Africa (Brad and Angelina’s favorite adoption continent).

I am an amazingly clever person, partly perhaps because I did not attend an Ivy League university but a University with actual subjects in which I learned stuff.
Despite all these thrilling virtues, however, I frequently have trouble with doors. Doesn’t matter how many instructions they have on ‘em, I push and pull and always do the wrong thing.

Eventually something happens or someone comes along and the door will open, but seldom because of anything I do. The doors I deal with have no Spanish signs on them. Perhaps that’s the problem.

I blame Bush!/Echarle la culpa a Bush!
(best I could do since I don’t speak Spanish. I blame Bush for that too.)

Barack Obama is a poorly read and intellectually shallow man. I honestly doubt whether Obama can even read a serious work. The writings of a Ludwig Von Mises or F.A. Hayek are likely far above his ability to comprehend. Obama merely embraces a few ill developed economic ideas concerning wealth sharing and “stimulus spending.” The last one is particularly popular with left-wing politicians because it enables them to provide bribes to their supporters. Neither Sachs nor Obama ever learned how to think and follow a logical argument. That is rarely achieved by anyone attending an Ivy League university. Their graduates are usually well-behaved intellectual whores who learn how to lie and slime. They follow the herd and are “goal oriented.” The search for truth is deemed boring and unrewarding. These Ivy Leaguers are primarily obsessed by one single question: will this look good on my resume?

I wonder if our President has ever read a single novel by Vladamir Nabokov — and seeing the excellent movie by Stanley Kubrick (another genius) doesn’t count. Although, for fans, I should inform you that Nabokovhimself wrote the screenplay for that masterpiece! I cannot think of another film where a famed author of that caliber actually wrote the film’s screenplay!

I can still hear the opening, “Quilty… Quilty! I’ve come to kill you!” (probably have it wrong, but close enough)

Author William Goldman was a big time screenwriter in the 70′s. If your interested he wrote a couple of Hollywood exposes that are searingly critical of the Hollywood production process. Probably long out of print

David, I recently read a book called The Roots of Obama’s Rage by Dinesh D’Souza. It makes sense. I recommend it. Summary – Obama is enacting anticolonial policies on America as per the dreams FROM his father. D’Souza substantiates this throughout the book. Interesting read.

Re grade inflation @ Harvard: that has been going on for at least 40 years. I needed to take Philosophy of Science (or similar) to graduate from MIT in 1971 but had to take the course at Harvard. It was a lecture course. We were informed that if we turned in a paper at the end we would receive an ‘A’. I did and I did! But otherwise I never went back!

Backing your statement up, I was the Dean of Admissions at a Catholic University and we had a student from Princeton take a summer course. she subsequently dropped out and so we called her to see if there was a problem etc.
Her answer: “It was too hard”.
Hmmmmm.

Grade inflation is a long standing problem. I was a graduate teaching fellow in Poli Sci at the U of Michigan in the mid-1970s, responsible for two classes. I was frankly appalled by the low quality of writing and argument found in many of the research papers submitted to me, and I applied grading standards I was used to from McGill U in Montreal. The collective response I got from my students was “What the hell!”

I allowed those who complained to resubmit their papers without penalty, taking advantage of the critiques and suggestions I’d offered. It was more work for me, but their second attempts were much better. The old maxim still applies: Set high standards and expectations, and most will rise to meet them.

And apropos, one of my students had a boyfriend who’d gone to Princeton where many first year students were taking “remedial” English and math courses. At Princeton!

Google VDH -half million or so hits. Google Sachs, twice as many. Proof that the insular world of PJM is not indicator of the will or knowledge of the American people. Who is VDH? Exactly. But don’t let that dissuade you from your loyalties. That’s how it goes in Pig Holler.

Hmmm… and for you, the number of Google hits represents a measure “of the will or knowledge of the American people”? Well, whether or not we “know” VDH or Sachs, we certainly “know” enough from this to dismiss Your Sensei’s judgment, such as it is.

I am seriously trying to follow your argument, but it simply does not make any sense.
“Google VDH -half million or so hits. Google Sachs, twice as many.”
Actually “About 486,000 results” for Jeffrey Sachs and “About 308,000 results” for VDH makes approximately 1.5 times as many, but anyway.

“Proof that the insular world of PJM is not indicator of the will or knowledge of the American people.”

Now, how does that follow? The number of search results reflects “will or knowledge of the American people”? In which way exactly? Sorry, but this just does NOT make any sense.

Seriously Your Sensei. What was your post meant to convey? If you have an argument to make, or something of substance to share, then do so. Google scorekeeping is irrelevant, and your “pig holler” comment is no more than a gratuitous insult. Both betray a shallow undisciplined mind.

Google “Your Sensei” and you’ll get 254,000 hits on a huge number of persons and topics. Google “Victor Davis Hanson” and you’ll get a half-million or so hits by or about…. Victor Davis Hanson.

By “Your Sensei”‘s illogic, that’s “proof” that the insular world of “Your Sensei” is not indicator of the will or knowledge of the American people. (would someone please try to tease apart the meaning of YS’s logic here? — how can google hits “indicate” the will or knowledge of anyone?)

All we really need to know about “Your Sensei” is in his last sneering reference to Pig Holler. That’s where classical scholars such as VDH come from, the intellectual boondocks.

Face it: if Your Sensei had a substantive argument to make, he would have made it.

While WE may reasonably agree that race and ethnicity are not legitimate platforms to base our vote the progressives have made it so for many millions. And, for those of us who are still capable of reason we ignore that fact at our own peril – both from a physical standpoint and political standpoint.

People like Sachs love to have reason thrown back at them. They can simply ignore it and continue on with their attack and emotional plea as a substitute for reason.

The multitudes that follow the likes of Sachs and agree with him are no less the enemy of the U.S. than other subversives that are trying to destroy the foundations of the United States. The Constitution means nothing to them. It is an obstacle in the way of taking the United States from those of us who were raised with the idea that the Constitution is a declaration of freedom for us and our posterity. To the likes of Sachs and La Raza and MECHA they see the United States and her wealth as something they have become entitled to and should be first in line for the redistribution.

Victor, when I was a young boy, my friend and I would play “Army” in a sandbox. Each would take a side of the sandbox, build a fort and place our Army Men in the fort. After we set everything up, each guy would take a turn throwing a baseball to knock the men over. Whoever had the last man standing won.
You know, sachs was right about you! Whenever I would set up my fort some odd 50 years ago, I would say to myself…..”What would Victor Davis Hanson, the bloodthirsty heathen, do”?

Dr. Hanson do you sometimes think oh not again when responding to some progressive acolytes ?

I see the discourse as between persons who live in different universes. Guterriez opposed as politician to persons who exist without the protections of political sinecure and safety in statements noticeably fantastical.

With Dr. Sachs however it becomes a teachable moment: to, by his example, show that prestige credentials are not a basis on which to make judgements independent of evidence on which various agree to the accuracy and logic (example the CRU data … of recent times) To give the student the experience to recognise faulty reasoning, to supporting independent judgements with Facts rather than fashion,litany, a “good grade”, and remaining as member in the club.

Dr.Sachs ought to receive sympathy and compassion for using himself as example of his lessons / his teachable moments.

I don’t know much about this Sachs, but I can well imagine having him as a lecturer and trying to reason with him on any factual basis at all….compared with the lucidity and information provided by VDH on any subject. God help honest Harvardians, if there are any left.

Jeffrey Sachs, the smug “teacher” who will “explain” the truth for you if you just accept that he’s a guru with mystical wisdom, is one of the reasons (there are others) I quit reading Scientific American. The editors couldn’t have planted a better socialist flag in the magazine.

That exchange on Scarborough’s show, “Anything that Hanson says I’m likely to disagree with” should revive our vigilance to defend our country’s heritage against the inimical intentions the one-worlder’s have for our way of life.

It reminds us of their habit when confronted with evidence of responding with emotion—in order to spar with straw-men of their own invention.

It reaffirms our conviction of their potential for treachery and renews the call for our reenlistment with the forces fighting in the cultural war against these collectivists who would proceed in haste with Red Guard-like purges if ever they had the power to do it.

Gutierrez is allowed to be subjective and or racist because he is a member of a minority, i.e. non-white. There is a double standard and it is imposed on ourselves by ourselves. The same thing is happening in Europe. It is a form of mass insanity in my opinion. It boggles the mind that any citizen thinks that people like Gutierrez and Sotomayor and Obama have any thing good to offer this country. They are all third worlders.

Prof. Hanson,
Your characterization of Mr. Sachs as ‘juvenile’ is simply right on. The juvenile response typically is to lash out, emotional, unfocussed and personal, because there is little thought. Pretty sad actually, for a supposed adult to act like a petulant child.

Mr Hanson, so you’re the guy who got us into these wars, shame you bad boy !
For a while I thought it was a religious faith that has waged war for centuries, this islam thing, that our war was something continually supported, voted on, given financial backing through both Republican and Democratic Congresses, etc. All along I was wrong.
On the other hand, it is possible that Sachs is a vituperative madman, not that he’s alone on the left.

John, I believe that “True believers” are the largest reason for war and genocide in humanity not religion as commonly thought. Although it could be argued that statism,progressivism, et al are defacto religions.

“…some distasteful animal metaphors used in the context of illegal immigration by a number of officials and would-be officials that clearly cross the line of common decency. These, I think, are not the norm, but Navarrette is right nevertheless they must be condemned as reckless and thinly veiled racist speech.

Come on now, Professor. I agree with 99.746% of what you say, but you’re actually buying into this outrageous slur by Navarette?

There are millions of words spoken by the opponents of illegal immigration. Navarette cited five examples that use animal metaphors. But you have to be looking for and heavily spin these to make it look like the speakers are calling the illegals animals.

Take the one with the “cockroaches”. The comment was that if we can track something coming across the borders as small as a cockroach, we can certainly see something as large as a human being. The point had to do with our ability to follow something very small, so why can’t we do it with something much larger? It in no way implied that illegals were nothing more than “cockroaches”.

If I were to say that the sudden decision to leave government and spend more time with their families of a whole rash of Obama appointees was like “rats leaving a sinking ship”, you could spin that to claim I was calling Larry Summers, et al, “rats”. But a normal human being would understand immediately that I am referring to the cowardly act of “leaving the sinking ship”, not the rats per se.

But of course this is the leftling style. Twist and re-define and rip out of normal context any word or string of words that can be used against a speaker. I am really sad to see someone as intelligent and insightful as yourself fall for this baseless charge by Navarette, a one-trick pony who wishes to see totally open borders (only for Hispanics) and like any good Democrat, drools over those tens of millions of Undocumented Future Democratic Voters of America that amnesty will bring.

This center-right country has finally woken up, with the Tea Parties proving it in November, and the socialist agenda has been thoroughly “refudiated”. The left understands quite well that without an infusion of brand new leftist votes from somewhere outside the current system, their agenda is kaput, dead, over.

The MSM likes to claim that it continues a news reporting function. However, the very fact that Sachs could say these things on “Morning Joe” and escape unscathed proves that the show does not exist to inform, unless the commission of a wild-a**ed ad hominem is news.

Our immigration problems began on the doorstep of the Democratic Party and are sustained there today. There can be no doubt that the Democratic Party sees national immigration policy as a political tool to be wielded against Republicans and Conservatives, not as law that is to be applied neutrally. This fact should be a central part of all discussions of immigration at the national and local levels. Gutierrez’s statements reflect the PC doctrine that everyone in higher education must live under today. This PC doctrine must be confronted or it will spread its poisons even more deeply. I salute Professor Hanson for confronting that doctrine. I pray that his employer will not succumb to the mighty pressures of PC.

The unreliable oracle, Wikipedia, lists Sachs as an academic economist who recommends economic policies for poor countries. If he got paid for his MSNBC rant, that would be nearly the only time he has ever worked for an organization which pays taxes.

VDH inevitably picks up on the symptoms of the latest leftist outrage (of which there are legion every day), but he never has the intellectual cojones to conclude what the solution should be. I’m tired of so-called conservatives like VDH who are unable or unwilling to understand, boldly state, and fight for solutions based on true conservative philosophy. As Lawrence Auster has stated:
“A traditionalist (or a reactionary) recognizes a threat to his society the moment it appears.
A conservative recognizes the threat when it has half-destroyed the society.
A liberal only recognizes the threat after it has completely destroyed the society, or, alternatively, he never recognizes it at all.”
A plague on all your houses… America is lost, and so-called conservatives don’t even realize it.

OK, Charles! At the risk of spoiling Christmas, what SPECIFIC and ACHIEVABLE solutions are you proposing short of civil war? Don’t pontificate about the strengths or weaknesses of the philosophies of others in your reply. Instead, give us all your workable strategy to painlessly and quickly avert the catastrophic end that you already conceded is here. But then again, if the end is already here this request will be moot. So, I guess that we’ll all have to indulge in a little more eggnog tonight instead!

For I note that, aside from denigrating VDH, you propose nothing. You cite Auster, whose most famous book I have read, but you do not mention his proposed solutions – though, to be fair, his main book is 20 years old, and may no longer apply – nor do you venture your own.

VDH suggest equality before the law, an elegant and equitable solution.

The liberals and the pro-Dream Act clumsily try to present this as a Finder-keeper situation -

Yes, it’s not these youngsters’ fault that they were inserted in an illegal manner in USA – correct.
Yet, while one may unwittingly owe stolen merchandise, if the perps of the operation are caught, the merchandise is returned to the rightful owner.
And in this case, the stolen merchandise (each guy over 16 years owes about $250 K to the taxpayers – medical assistance, welfare, education costs, etc.), cannot be retrived anymore, but they can be stopped from acquiring more stolen merchandise (and encourage others to do so) by being sent back in Mexico -

Further, the Dems know very well that injecting in the mass of this nation 13 million foreigners, uniformly uninterested in this country’s ways and civilization, and almost genetically connected with gobermiento services would help maintain their ruinous grip on this country’s destiny – the California elections has confirmed this -

So they’ll do anything to continue their national undermining operation, disregarding the social ruin ensuing –

Secure the borders, no to Dream Act and fix ASAP the absurdity that the 14th. has became -

There is no finder-keeper here – those guys must be stopped from acquiring stolen property, and be sent back to wherever they belong -

Granted, Sachs is a troubled person. But a phenomena of most talk shows is for a guest’s mouth to speed up and his brain to slow down. I bet Sachs would like to rephrase those thoughts so we would know what he really thinks of VDH.

When JFK ran for President some people voted against him
because they thought he was a Catholic American rather
than an American Catholic.

The question of whether one is a Hispanic American or
an American Hispanic will often be asked of Hispanic
citizens in future, by their friends and relatives,
including refugees from the collapse of Mexico, and
by non-Hispanic citizens.

There will be more of this kind of Latino racialist Mumbo-Jumbo in the years ahead because keeping Latinos upset about the majority attitude toward illegal immigration is just too important for the future of the Democratic Party.

But do people like Rep. Gutierrez really care about what is happening to individual Mexicans in Mexico? It’s seems that only after a Mexican crosses the border do people like him regard them as being worth their weight in political gold.

Mr. Hanson you can safely ignore the jibes from people on the Left. Whatever political currency the Left continues to have is being rapidly spent by Obama and these people are just too blind to see it.

“That an illegal alien from a European country would claim my allegiance or empathy on the basis of ethnic solidarity would have zero currency.”

I simply don’t believe this to be true. But then you don’t have to really explain why; we’ll just have to take your at your word as a matter of trust. The great VDH can avoid the “unfortunate ethnic appeal” and remain above the fray.

The problem with framing your argument from this perspective (after pointing out how the “left” uses the issue of race in a vain attempt to tamp down your otherwise cogent arguments) is that you waste zero cyber-ink on the (what must be the formidable task) of defending or explaining why the learned right would complaint just as strongly about an excess of illegal immigration from Western Europe.

There are well over half of a million illegal immigrants from Europe and Canada here in the States now.

The only sound I hear is the chirping of crickets. Where’s the outrage Dr.?

Fine, Nate, if you really want to do a parity swap I’ll be glad to trade off a few tens of millions of illegal aliens here from Mexico for this alleged half million European illegals. I’ll even throw in a few million extra Mexicans just to make you feel like the majority isn’t racist for doing exactly what Mexico would do if it our problems. That’s right, Nate, Mexico is one of the most proactive countries in the world as regard illegal immigration into its domain. It wouldn’t put up with our problems for two seconds, but we’re the ones that are racist. Nevermind.

Back in the 1980′s, though of Irish descent, it struck me as unreasonable that so many Irish were in San Francisco illegally working in the trades. It did not seem unreasonable that Immigration would periodically swoop on the Irish bars in the afternoon and try to find and arrest and deport illegal Irish workers.

So, exactly why are you pretending that somehow VDH is a hypocrite?

Granted, the restoration of Victorian houses would suffer from a lack of Irish plasterers who know what they are doing. But there is no reason to pretend that the illegal immigrant Irish should not be deported – and they were. And no one ever said a word about it, either.

Also in the 1980s, I knew a young hard-working Irish bartender who overstayed his visa and was deported. And I knew a Japanese woman who worked for a bank. She married an American to avoid being sent back to Japan, but the man she married was gay, and the Feds saw right through her ploy and deported her.

These are the only people I ever knew who ended up getting deported. I often wonder why they were subjected to such close scrutiny whereas we close our eyes to what goes on at our southern border.

VDH, in reading your essay today, I came away with a reaction to the Guttierez AND Sachs outbursts that feels as if it applies equally.

It is this:

A guilty conscience needs no accuser.

Guttieriez conscience betrays him when it subliminally chooses words that expose intentions he is trying to hide. The DREAM act is about crass political motivations, a die casting machine that creates leftist voters out of non-American citizens…pumping them out like an assembly line, without regard for the craftsmanship of assimilation, allegiance to the land of ours, stability and protection of our citizenry, our economy, our ability to advance as a nation.

When this seeps out of leftists, the non-Americans (they certainly do not have citizenship yet, how can they be called anything else at this point?) are told to look at their “enemies”…the American people who wish to maintain an orderly process toward citizenship.

The DREAM act is actually a foothold for amnesty for everyone who crashed the borders. It is incremental amnesty, because if the children stay, how could we possibly deprive them of their parents? It’s a hidden attempt to import leftist Democrats and frame the issue as inhumane to even speak of the plot.

But, we don’t have to…the guilty conscience does the speaking for us.

Leftists repeat this act with every possible group they can find, to divide this country against itself. If they cannot win hearts and minds with the ideology of leftism in its pure state, they will do so by trickery, deceit and fraud.

Yet, listen to their words when they make an argument and you will hear the conscience betray the voice. Oh, some are better at keeping the mask on than others. They will try to look and sound “centrist”, “compassionate”, “populist”.

But it always will come back to the same thing. Creating more leftists, more victimization, more divisiveness, more animus toward America, Americans and especially non-leftists.

As for Sachs reaction to your astute observations about Obama’s abnegation betrayed Sachs’ inner turmoil over the subject matter,

Living a life in a leftist cocoon where all matters are “settled” once the leftist imprimatur has been established, the finely honed debating skills of the “elites”, reduced to spitting, shouting, screeching and saying “because I said so”.

“Winning” an argument via tantrum is de rigueur.

I said in Ron Radosh’s essay about this, that VDH does not need the likes of me to defend him from Sachs. My instinct is to want to do so, but the mighty do not need protection from the puny.

Your response was simple and elegant. And righteous. Bravo, VDH…I learn every time I come here.

Back in the good ol’ pre-Tailhook Navy, when hilarious politically incorrect call-signs were the rule and not the exception, my husband had a squadron-mate whose last name was Sachs. His call-sign was “Scrotum”. This was even stenciled on the side of the jet in the usual style : LT Ernie “Scrotum” Sachs.
I move that henecforth, we refer to Prof. Sachs by this same apt moniker.
Live by the ad hominem, die by the ad hominem.

Unfortunately, Rep. Gutierrez doesn’t seem to understand that his lack of interest in the greater good, namely anyone who isn’t hispanic, is at the heart of why Latin America is so broken that people want to leave it.

Gutierrez is a man who should be run out of this country but instead is a racist part of the gov’t itself. That is why this country is in such hot water.

While I certainly agree in spirit with the idea of not comparing ethnicity to animals, Mr. Navarrette in my mind made no cogent argument for “illegal immigrants as comparable to cows, rats, dogs, grasshoppers, cockroaches, and livestock.” In fact, Mr. Navarrette seems to be ideologically aligned with Rep. Gutierrez and so is arguably a worse bigot than the people he took to task who more or less sounded like black folks who don’t like the term “black hole” used in their presence.

Sachs is no more capable of articulating his thoughts on his feet than McClellan was in articulating moving elements of The Army of the Potomac.

Until the 1930s, blacks voted 90% Republican (party of Lincoln). After FDR paid for their votes with New Deal handouts, they’ve been 90% Dem voters. Hispanics are the same deal. If one party offers to buy their votes by granting racial favors, that race will vote 80-90% for them. The GOP dilemma is that if they bid too openly for the Hispanic vote, their white supporters, being only half-heartedly represented now, will bolt to a third party. After the sorry lame-duck session just ended, the ties that bind whites to the GOP are fraying badly.

The bottom line is that if a land bridge connected Eastern Europe to the United States and illegal immigration emanated from there, and those lawbreakers voted Republican, the Democrats would have machine gun nests set up at each entry point to murder every man, woman and child who walked into our nation.

Fortunately, illegal immigration is now a settled issue. The Open Borders movement has been destroyed, there never will be another amnesty, and politicians involved in this criminality will be crushed like bugs in most places. The next step is mass deportations, and anyone who doesn’t think that will happen is about to get a glimpse of how a true nation reacts to these outrages.

Asinine clowns like Rep. Guitierrez have been delivered the message: never again.

Joe Scarbourough, this guy was a Republican? His timing is perfect, as leftism is increasingly exposed, he continues to slither in that direction. Join the snakes Joe.
Has the ambulance come for Sachs yet?

Dr Hanson, Just how the hell old are you? You must be pushing 100 or more to have influenced all those Americans enough to get us into WWI and WWII. I’m 72 now and until the internet and more specifically PJM I’d never heard of you, even after spending close to 30 years in the Military fighting all those wars YOU started! Shame on you, no wonder I was never able to get home for Christmas! LOL

That a person is bereft of facts to support their claims is inconsequential, provided the audience is as vacuous and stupid as Scarborough, et al. Who needs facts when histrionics and faux moral outrage will suffice. Dangerous idealism exists and thrives in fertile ground, and three generations of dumb-downed Americans is the perfect soil.

Have to echo the sentiment about Scientific American and Sachs. What a shame how the leftists have ruined that publication. I don’t think Sachs writes for them anymore, but there are plenty of others there of his ilk.

I remember right after the last Presidential election, they ran a piece on a study done by some journalism prof on the percent of favorable media coverage for Obama versus McCain. The conclusion was that McCain got substantially better press! I wondered how such an obviously bizarre finding could me made, but then I looked at the dates during which the sample was taken. It was from early in the nomination process, when Hillary! was the media-annointed Democrat, and the media was helping McCain get the Republican nomination so they could then sandbag him! So it was not a measure of Obama vs. McCain at all, but a measure of an Obama who was opposing a media favorite in Hillary, versus a McCain who was being plumped for the nomination of the other party! Published in such proximity to the election, of course, most readers would have assumed it was meansured during the actual election season! Despicable.

The stench must be awful at the SciAm offices. I have let my subscription (of 25 years) lapse.

I noted with some pleasure the reflection: “Follow the disturbing logic that ignores principle and focuses on raw self-interest: either grant amnesty on my terms to some of those who are here illegally or we are going to punish you as enemies (perhaps channeling the president’s own election-eve characterization) at the polls.” as a solid thrust at the likes of shill and opportunist Rep. Luis Gutierrez.

One other point to consider when pondering the aspect of self-interest that also must not be ignored, it softens the manner of the assertion of caution in retaliations: Those who are citizens, are trying to become citizens, take it now as an affront and even a betrayal of their faith and trust in the law and those who are charged with representing us, to find deference given to those who have earned nothing of what they receive but demand even more than those who indeed do given only obligation and are thankful rather than demanding. That will not diminish, but will grow as others come to be real citizens of the United States of America with its very real freedoms. A big one: The Freedom to say NO.
Nothing speaks more loudly than one who is eager to give away what belongs to someone else.
My freedoms cannot be taken without a fight and any argument only shows where the enemy is and how to deal with them.
Thank you again.
Merry Christmas to you sir.

While I’m not trying to justify the use of “raza” word, I have to point out that we (yes, I am a latino) use that word in a very very very loose way. It’s true it’s a annoying error, I always loved the dictionaries and I love to be guided by clear definitions and concepts, and I always denounced that way of speak between latinamerican people. Still, that phenomenon exists.

I remember when I was student, if you failed an exam they would say to you “no te da la raza!” conveying the meaning “you failed because you are obviously of an inferior race”. If you take that sentence seriously, then sure it’s racism. But in the tricky latin way of speaking, it’s just another void phrase with the real meaning being “you failed because you’re a moron, get over it and don’t blame anything else -like the race”.

The truth is: raza has not a significant meaning for us, latinamerican. Even when it has a precise meaning in the dictionary. We don’t use that word seriously because it’s kind of surreal for us. My ancestors are a mixture of portoguese, spanish, jewish, africans, native americans (incas, huancavilcas, caras, and a big etc), I am of no race, and I am of many of them, I just don’t care, and nobody really cares.

And Latinamerican people is always tricky when they speak, they have lots of sarcasm, innuendos, double/triple meanings, it’s really crazy but it’s a real phenomenon and very deeply rooted in our culture (culture?). Please don’t blame Spanish people for this, they usually are more precise in their speaking, but latin-americans not. Latin-americans probably are going to use a word in the wrong way with the worst possible meaning just to annoy you, I hate that but, again, that’s the way it is.

I remember a video (I think posted in PJM by Zombie) in which a latin-american woman got into a public protest. There was a group demonstrating against the illegal immigration, and the woman got there furiously speaking about “we latins are going to conquer this country, white people back to Europe”.

And of course, Zombie rightfully denouncing this. In any case, as a latin-american myself, I couldn’t avoid to think a big “LOL”, because in my very latin view, that woman was there to annoy just because she can. I admit it, latin-americans can be an annoyance, we like parties, we like dancing and we can teach you some salsa and merengue steps. But politically, we just like to bother the other side. I am capitalist, and I’ve used the tactic also here in Europe against the average left-leaning euro, I’ve been there and done that but on the other side. I’ve been in socialist parades with an american flag JUST to annoy them, I’ve put israeli flags in front of a neonazi demonstration JUST to annoy them, then when asked about opinions and talks, I’ve said the worst things just for them to be annoyed. I’ve spoken also about Capitalism, I love to see annoyance in their euro-faces when I praise America and Free markets and Bush and how tasty is Oil for breakfast.

I just can’t get over it, it’s my latin background. Just happens that I am capitalist one. But if you understand how annoying we like to be, then when you find a liberal latino you will keep cool and, who knows, you can come up with a creative way to counter the annoyance. Otherwise, the scene with the woman will repeat always: sure she disagreed, but she just couldn’t help going there and say the most annoying things she could (like “white people back to Europe!”).

There is a said in Latin America: “el que se pica, pierde”, or “the one who gets upset/irritated first, is the one who lose the argument”… crazy, but for real.

You don’t need me to remind you that Sachs is basically an idiot, he’s been wrong about just about everything he has come near for maybe 15 or 20 years. But of course he takes the “approved” positions so facts don’t enter into it, the lefty foundations, media and pols all cover for each other so no one ever gets held to account. In some sense, Obama’s misfortune, if such it is, is that as President his errors are too obvious and “out there” to be dismissed as the Left does for all the similar errors made by its less-accountable members.

You may not know, however, that before entering politics, Luis Gutierrez was a — tah dah!!!– community organizer here in Chicago. He was always a thug and a race-baiter. Then he entered politics and was elected alderman, in which position he continued to be a thug and a race-baiter. And for some years, now, a thuggish, race-baiting Congressman. Any “movement” that would choose or even accept him as a leader and its public persona is beyond suspect, by that fact alone it proves its bad faith and depravity.

Sacxhs accusation that yhou have led the US into wars is VERY intersting. Recently a similar accusation was made against an Australian conservative columnist, to wit, Andrew Bolt. Bob Brown, the leader of the Greens party here, called for his sacking from his paper:

“Dear Editor,

Andrew Bolt has blood on his hands. He stridently insisted on the invasion and killings in Iraq which led to millions fleeing. Some of those millions ended up in the ocean off Christmas Island on Wednesday.

Andrew Bolt’s call, while bodies were still in the ocean, for Julia Gillard’s resignation (but the Labor Party opposed the war in Iraq) lacked human decency. He should resign.

Senator Bob Brown”

Same situation, you see. BB doesn’t call for the resignation of any PMs, politicians or generals, no, only that of a lone opinion columnist – who apprently has the ear of the entire miltary force!

The Mexican representative exploiter Gutierrez and leftist commentator Sachs are the “walking dead”. They scream loudly when they see or hear the living but their real need is to eat the living in hope of getting some of that life for themselves. Their real problem is that even after eating the living they are still dead.
It must be strange to hear the dead speak of you on TV and to see the damage those high caliber words and that sharp sword of yours have accomplished, having made you the most dangerous man in America: “Anything that Hanson says I’m likely to disagree with, cause no commentator has done more harm to the American people actually than that guy who led us into all these disastrous wars. But aside from that” – Good for you Dr Hanson, you have now replaced the gods of Olympus, Barack Obama and have complete control over mankind. I had thought education was a good thing and that remembering history was a wise thing but never thought it would turn you into a god, I was wrong.
Keep that sword sharp and that powder dry, we shall all need it.

I thinks that “Prof” Sachs real name is “Prof Hachs”. That could also be spelled Hack or Haqq, depending where in the world you are. Hachs could be his European name, Hack his name in America, and Haqq elsewhere

This reminded me of the time Soulja Boy tried to claim he was bigger than JayZ or Kanye (for those genxer’s in the crowd). Or what would happen if I spit on Tiger Woods’ shoe and said, “It’s on Punk, You->Me, 18 holes, you pick the course” A totally unskilled featherweight goes after the Pimp Daddy of serious intellectualism and can’t even throw a decent sucker punch at him. I’d feel bad for sachs if he wasn’t so damned deserving